Pathways to Practice: A Fireside Chat with Cem Kalelioğlu on Building an International Career in International Arbitration

Turkish Arbitration Blog (''TARB'')

Interview Series – Av. Cem Kalelioğlu[1]

Interview by Burak Aydoğan[2]

Pathways to Practice:  A Fireside Chat with Cem Kalelioğlu on Building an International Career in International Arbitration

Questions

1.)  To start things off, could you tell us a bit about your journey? What first sparked your interest in international arbitration, and how has that initial inspiration shaped your career path and led you to where you are today?  Specifically, you completed your law degree at Université Paris Nanterre, then pursued your master’s at Trinity College Dublin, and later returned to the same university where you completed your LLB to pursue a PhD. At what point did arbitration become an area of interest for you, and how did that interest develop?

Answer:  Growing up, I wanted to be a diplomat or politician – with law as a backup – partly because I come from a family of lawyers and have always had a natural aptitude for debate.  By the time I reached university age, I realized that a career as a diplomat or politician was not the right path for me – but that I could use the same skills in a different setting, particularly in high-stakes, politically sensitive cases.  That drew me naturally toward international law, which I decided to master even though I had only a broad sense of what its practice might look like at the time.  What I did know, however, was that I needed the strongest possible foundation.

With that in mind, I chose to study in France, and quite deliberately selected Université Paris Nanterre – then, and still today, a hub for leading scholars in public international law such as Alain Pellet, Jean-Marc Thouvenin, Mathias Forteau, Franck Latty, and Brigitte Stern.  Many of them were part of the institution (“Centre de droit international de Nanterre” or CEDIN for short), which I later joined myself during my PhD studies, and some went on to become my professors or supervisors.

It was in the third year at Nanterre, that I had my first substantial exposure to international arbitration.  Until then, my exposure to international law had been almost entirely public international law, but I found myself increasingly drawn to the private side – particularly private international law, which I discovered I also genuinely enjoyed.  Back then, I also realized that to build the kind of practice I aspired to, I needed to straddle both civil and common law traditions, especially on the commercial/private international law side.

Indeed, from early on, I was conscious that I did not want to be pigeonholed – whether as a “Turkish,” “French,” “Irish,” or “English” lawyer, or narrowly as a public international law specialist.  I wanted to develop a profile broad enough to navigate different legal systems and diverse types of disputes with equal confidence. 

That understanding shaped my next steps:  I pursued an LLM in Ireland, where I later qualified, and moved to the UK, where I also later qualified as a solicitor.  Along the way, I also spent time as a visiting researcher at the Max Planck Institute in Luxembourg and worked with a German arbitration boutique.  To round out the mix, I also qualified in Türkiye.  So today, I am qualified in England and Wales, Ireland, and Türkiye, and also hold full rights of audience before the Astana International Financial Centre Court.

I consider myself fortunate that my ambition to build a truly diverse practice, and the foundational efforts I invested early on, have borne fruit.  Specifically, I have been fortunate to work alongside some of the most respected practitioners.  The experience has profoundly shaped both my advocacy skills and my approach to complex disputes, which I will carry with me forever.  What I value most is that those who saw something in me never saw me through a narrow lens; instead, they recognized my truly international background and the breadth it brings, which allowed me to develop into the international arbitration lawyer I am today.

Over time, my practice has naturally evolved into the diverse and international practice that I had always hoped to build.  In both commercial and investor-State arbitration, I have worked on high-stakes cases that involved complex legal and factual issues. 

On the investor-State side, I have represented clients in ICSID and PCA-administered UNCITRAL proceedings under various BITs and the Energy Charter Treaty, across sectors including construction, energy, aerospace, manufacturing, and agriculture.  These matters have often involved novel jurisdictional arguments and complex factual matrices – precisely the types of cases I find most stimulating.  On the commercial arbitration side, my dual civil- and common-law background allowed me to handle complex disputes under a wide array of applicable laws, including English, French, Swedish, Swiss, Turkish, and Egyptian, to name a few.  These disputes spanned sectors such as construction, energy, mining, real estate, telecoms, and were conducted under the rules of most major arbitral institutions, including ICC, LCIA, SCC, SAC, SIAC, CRCICA, and CAS, as well as under the UNCITRAL rules.

I have also had the opportunity to advise and represent clients in public international law matters, including test cases before the European Court of Human Rights, which has been an immensely rewarding complement to my arbitration work.  In addition, having served as tribunal secretary to leading arbitrators for a number of years, I am now developing my own arbitrator practice.    

2.) So, after developing your interest in arbitration, how did you manage to build a professional career in this very competitive field in a very competitive market in London?

Answer:  I find the best way to explain this is through a football analogy, which I think has many parallels with international arbitration.  Speaking from my experience in London, the international arbitration market in London is very much the “Premier League” of the market – the top tier that everyone aspires to play in.  International arbitration lawyers from Asia, Europe, the Middle East, and the rest of the world want to compete at this level, because being in this league means your advocacy skills are constantly tested and refined at the highest level.  But as in football, it is not just about getting in – it is also about staying in, improving every day, growing as a lawyer, and consistently delivering results for clients that exceed expectations.  And trust me, that takes a lot of hard work, focus, and sacrifice – both professionally and personally.

Think of someone like Arda Güler, hitting the spotlight with a new coach who trusted him and gave him the opportunity – or Mohamed Salah, who went on to dominate the Premier League at Liverpool under Jürgen Klopp.  International arbitration is similar:  you need to be ready, capable, and at the top of your game, with the hunger to outwork and outgrow competitors who may have more advantageous backgrounds.  When you combine that foundation, skill, and drive with the right opportunity at the right moment, that is when the real breakthroughs happen.

3.) In your opinion, what specific steps should a law student in Türkiye — who studies mainly domestic law and has limited exposure to foreign legal systems — take to pursue a career in international commercial arbitration?  What would you recommend to law students who are still in university and wish to explore this field during their studies?

Answer:  If I were to give one piece of advice to students aspiring to practice international arbitration, it would be this:  master Turkish law as a first step but know that there will be multiple steps ahead. 

Turkish law is, in many ways, an ideal foundation for international arbitration as it is on its own a comparative law system.  Turkish civil law draws on Swiss law, administrative law is heavily influenced by French law, and commercial law incorporates elements of French, German, and Swiss law.  Once you master the underlying legal concepts, you will see the same concepts and legal reasoning recur across multiple civil law systems.

International arbitration, at its core, is procedural – but your effectiveness as counsel comes from both your knowledge of the substantive law and advocacy skills.  The more deeply you understand the law, the more creative and persuasive you can be in crafting arguments for your clients.  At university, as a first step therefore, your focus should be on mastering these legal concepts at the highest level; this is the most valuable investment you can make for your future career.  As I said however, this is only the first step.

Once you have done that, and after your Turkish law studies, think strategically about bridging the gap between the domestic system and the global arbitration market.  Today, around 40% of international commercial contracts are governed by English law, which is followed by New York, Swiss, and French law.  If you aim to practice internationally, it is crucial to master one (or more) of these other legal systems – ideally through formal qualifications and bar exams. 

Coming back to the football analogy, know that this path may be even more challenging than for most football players.  Indeed, in football, everyone plays with the same ball; in international arbitration, you are often expected to play with rules, cultures, and legal systems that are fundamentally different from what you have originally trained in.  And you are expected to perform at a higher level than those who grew up within those systems, and to do so consistently. 

While this is challenging, it is also deeply rewarding and intellectually exhilarating.  When you are genuinely passionate about your work, and approach a client’s case as if it were your own – vigorously defending their rights and interests – you inevitably distinguish yourself.  The true differentiator is generally unwavering hunger and steadfast determination – the rest naturally follows from that mindset.

4.) To expand on my previous question, it seems that opportunities for law students, to work abroad can be quite limited. However, from what I’ve observed, arbitration offers a great way to overcome this limitation. From your perspective, what are the job opportunities in this field for graduates of Turkish universities within international law firms and the global legal community?

Answer:  I think you are partly right – compared to some other areas of law, Turkish lawyers may find it slightly easier to secure internships in arbitration abroad than, say, in transactional work.  But I would not say that translates into more associate opportunities.  The international arbitration market is known to be much more competitive.  So I would say that viewing arbitration as an easier route would be a total misconception.

That said, the international arbitration market does offer something quite unique:  it gives you the chance to develop and refine your advocacy skills early on through internships, which is invaluable and something that cannot really be learned from books or academic study alone.  This exposure – to how arguments are built, how cases are run, and how case strategy is crafted – is the most important steppingstone for anyone who wants to compete at the top level.

The reality, however, is that associate positions are very limited, and the market is highly competitive.  But it is certainly not impossible – I and a handful of other Turkish colleagues in the London and Paris markets are living proof that it can be done. 

In terms of opportunities, many leading arbitration practices – particularly in London and Paris – offer structured internship programs that attract a diverse mix of nationalities.  These programs provide equal exposure and experience to lawyers, and while only a few go on to secure associate roles later on, they are an excellent way to learn, build networks, and demonstrate the skills needed to compete at this level.

5.) English has often been seen as a barrier by many Turkish students. In your opinion, what level of language proficiency should someone aspiring to work in this field have? And in the field of arbitration, as in other areas, is English still the dominant language, or do other languages also hold significant influence?

Answer:  Yes, absolutely – English is the predominant language of international arbitration.  I have seen a few cases conducted in French, German, and Spanish, but they are really the exception rather than the rule.  So yes, mastering English is essential – but that is really the starting point.  In other words, the issue is not just proficiency in English.  While strong command of English is essential, it is ultimately only the most basic requirement.

Beyond proficiency in English, what truly matters is mastering advocacy – both written and oral – which are skills quite distinct from how pleadings are prepared and presented in most civil law systems.  And this is not a disadvantage unique to Turkish lawyers – the same applies to French, German, Swiss, Spanish, and other civil-law-trained practitioners.  The reality is that international arbitration has, over time, adopted the style and structure of common law advocacy.  Experienced tribunals, particularly in high-stakes cases, expect to see pleadings and advocacy of the same standard and form they are accustomed to in that tradition. 

Advocacy is, as I mentioned earlier, the second most critical skill for an international arbitration lawyer – and it is also the one that cannot be learned from books or in classrooms.  It is learned through exposure:  by observing, drafting, coming up with arguments, and absorbing how the best in the field do it. 

It is simple, really – you become as good an advocate as the people you have trained under.  That is why internships and early work experience in major hubs are so valuable; they allow you to watch these skills in practice, understand how case strategy and persuasion come together, and eventually apply them yourself when you step up as counsel.

So, in short – yes, English is absolutely essential.  But to play at the highest level, mastering how you persuade is what truly matters.

6.) Do you think practicing international arbitration in Türkiye is so different than practicing abroad? 

Answer:  I think the level of exposure and the type of work you encounter can differ quite significantly.  When practicing in Türkiye, counsel typically deal with cases governed by Turkish law – with a few exceptions – and there are relatively limited opportunities to work on investor-State arbitrations.  The market is still largely domestic and shaped by Turkish legal traditions, although it has evolved tremendously in recent years, especially thanks to domestic arbitral institutions like ISTAC and firms and practitioners offering services at a truly high international standard, which is something we should all be proud of. 

That said, the nature and diversity of work you see in major arbitration hubs can be quite different.  In major hubs, one day you might be dealing with a commercial arbitration governed by Nigerian law, and the next with an investor-State case under the Energy Charter Treaty.  That kind of exposure helps you grow, broadens your perspective, and ultimately shapes you into a global practitioner – someone who is not confined to one legal system but can navigate both civil and common law legal concepts with ease, across a wide range of jurisdictions and investor-State arbitrations.

That is why I always encourage colleagues to take on internships or secondments in major international arbitration hubs like London or Paris.  Even if your long-term plan is to build your career in Türkiye, those experiences abroad are transformative.  When people come back, they bring with them new perspectives and advocacy skills – and that, in turn, raises the overall quality in the market.  Of course, institutions, conferences, and support from various actors all play an important role in promoting a city as an international arbitration hub, but they can only take you so far.   Without talented next-generation lawyers with a global vision and high-quality skills, real improvement is limited.  What truly makes the difference is hands-on experience – learning how to think, argue, and strategize at the top level of top-tier global teams.  That is how you build the skills not just to compete with other jurisdictions, but to outperform them.  Continuing our football analogy:  you can build the best stadiums in the world, but without players skilled enough to compete internationally, you remain mediocre.  The real goal should be to outperform the leading global hubs – and that starts with having top-tier lawyers who can perform internationally.

7.) For young lawyers who wish to work in this field, do you see arbitration as an area with strong future potential and growing opportunities, or as a field where most needs are already met and there may be an oversupply of practitioners?

Answer:  I think there is still significant room for growth in the market.  The key, of course, is understanding where one positions oneself and what specific gap and value proposition one brings to the market. 

One advantage for Turkish lawyers is that many Turkish companies operate abroad, and their contracts almost always provide for international arbitration.  Many of those companies also often work in volatile jurisdictions, which can easily give rise to investor-State disputes.  This creates tremendous opportunities over the next decade, particularly for lawyers who can identify where they can add value.

I should mention that many of these contracts are governed by English, Swedish, Swiss, or local laws (most often imposed by the host State), which can limit what a lawyer with only Turkish law background can do in some cases.  However, they still have ways to get involved, especially in factual issues, and in cases where Turkish law is selected, they can really shine. 

So, if you are determined to build a diverse practice, I see a very bright future.  It may take persistence and strong effort to get there, but the opportunities – both domestically and internationally – are substantial. 

8.)  In your view what the Turkish arbitration community or more broadly lawyers can do to train aspiring Turkish arbitration lawyers at global standards?

Answer:  I think the most valuable contribution would come from Turkish law firms,  in-house counsel within Turkish companies, and those who are already practicing abroad. 

As I noted earlier, there are already highly capable Turkish arbitration practices, but they could also consider establishing formal or informal alliances with arbitration practices in major hubs that would enable aspiring Turkish arbitration lawyers to undertake secondments abroad for a year or two.  I genuinely believe this would not only elevate the quality of work and client service, but also strengthen the overall Turkish market over time.  Lawyers who receive this training will, in turn, mentor the next generation under the same high standards – and I cannot overstate that an international arbitration lawyer is only as good as the standard under which they were trained and supervised.

The same applies to in-house counsel who require external arbitration counsel.  They could consider requiring the external counsel to hire a Turkish lawyer to work on the case on a contract or secondment basis.  This arrangement may not only provide the in-house counsel with reliable, locally informed support – particularly on factual issues – but also cultivate the lawyer’s arbitration practice and help improve the market for the same reasons I explained earlier.   

I also see a critical role for those of us who have trained and currently practice in major arbitration hubs.  I am aware that we have a responsibility to connect with aspiring lawyers – whether through teaching or formal/informal mentorship – to share our knowledge and broaden their skill sets.  To make this truly effective, we need more structured, formalized links between Turkish arbitral institutions, law firms, universities, and practitioners abroad, moving beyond informal networks or ad hoc arrangements.  And I can say with conviction – and I am sure other colleagues would agree – that we are committed to passing on what we have learned to the next generation. 

9.) As you mentioned, you have studied law, trained, practiced and qualified in a number of jurisdictions, including England, France, Ireland, Germany, Luxembourg, and Türkiye.  Do you think that for Turkish law students, obtaining non-Turkish qualifications and gaining experience abroad is essential, or merely advantageous?

Answer:  I think it is a “must.”  I believe the era in which a single qualification was enough is long gone – especially for civil law lawyers.  To return to the football analogy: if you put Maradona and Messi on the same pitch today, people may debate endlessly about who is better, but the reality is that the game has evolved.  The same is true for international arbitration.  Over the past 20 years, the field has transformed dramatically, and counsel today must be able to regularly navigate both civil law and common law systems simultaneously.

A typical example is where a contract is governed by English law, while the seat of arbitration is in France.  That generally means procedural issues – including the validity of the arbitration agreement in the absence of an express choice in the arbitration agreement (which is often the case) – or mandatory rules will fall under French law, while the contractual and related tort claims will be governed by English law.  This is the average case.  And there are many  other cases that involve far more complex multijurisdictional issues.  It is simply not credible anymore for counsel to say “I am only X country’s lawyer.”

Of course, practical experience remains paramount.  But familiarity with the core concepts of both systems is essential, and the best way to truly master them is through proper legal education and/or bar qualifications.  I also anticipate that regulatory developments may further shape what counsel can do.  Arbitration has traditionally been more flexible – for example, US-qualified lawyers may routinely work on cases governed by English law.  But recent decisions, such as Mazur v. Charles Russell Speechlys, might be the start of a new trend.  There, the English High Court recently held that non-English-qualified lawyers cannot conduct litigation even under the supervision of qualified solicitors.  This does not yet extend to international arbitration, but we would be naïve not to monitor these developments.  The landscape for operating in international arbitration could look very different in ten years, and today’s graduates should be thinking about that already.

And finally – and perhaps most importantly – there is an issue of credibility.  Clients place immense value on qualifications.  Even if you are the most capable lawyer in the room, it will be difficult to earn a client’s trust without the credentials that demonstrate you can operate across the legal systems their disputes touch.   

10.) What factors do you think junior lawyers should consider when selecting an internship program?  Do you think boutique or international law firms better?

Answer:  From my perspective, both international and boutique firms offer valuable but very different training environments.  That said, for a junior lawyer, international firms generally provide a more structured and disciplined platform for development.

I often hear junior colleagues who trained at boutiques describing how they were entrusted with drafting major submissions with minimal supervision.  While that might feel empowering and encouraging at the time, it can also mean that crucial learning steps were skipped.  The craft of written advocacy is something you develop gradually and it involves rigorous feedback and continuous supervision.  Larger international practices tend to have the systems and senior oversight in place to ensure that progression happens effectively.  In other words, a junior international arbitration lawyer’s growth is only as strong as the supervision they receive.  Without consistent guidance, they would risk reinforcing their own assumptions rather than learning best practices.

Another clear advantage of international firms is the breadth of exposure.  International firms typically handle a wider variety of matters and maintain a more substantial pipeline of cases.  By contrast, boutiques often have a narrower portfolio, which can naturally limit the range of experience available to junior lawyers for the reasons we discussed earlier.

So, if we are talking about building a solid foundation, my view is that international law firms generally offer a more reliable training ground.  Of course, that’s not to discount the strengths of boutique environments, but speaking from experience, structured supervision makes all the difference in those early years.

11.) What advice would you give junior lawyers who have secured internships?

Answer:  If I could offer one piece of advice, it would be this: cultivate resilience.  And also remember that people are watching – not in a daunting way, but in the sense that your ability to persuade, legal competence, professionalism, curiosity, and your attitude leave an impression. 

Remember, too, that you are not only advancing your own career.  You are, in many ways, carrying the aspirations of a broader Turkish legal community.  Securing an internship of this caliber is no small feat; it is something many talented lawyers hope for.  Take a moment to be proud of that.

But also recognize that this is just the beginning.  It is a long, winding, and occasionally uphill road.  Yet, if you apply the fundamentals we discussed, you will find your footing.

In short, whatever you do is being closely observed – people are watching your moves both back home and in the market you operate in.  And, if I may borrow a recent political refrain, do make sure you “[keep] the volume up.”

12.) Finally, reflecting on your journey so far, what is one key lesson or guiding principle that has shaped your approach to both law and life - something you would like young practitioners to remember as they build their own paths?

Answer:  If I were to identify a single guiding principle that has shaped both my professional practice and my approach to life, it would be this quote from Franklin Roosevelt: “A smooth sea never made a skilled sailor.”  One of the things I truly admire about our nation is that resilience seems to be in our DNA – we are motivated precisely by challenges, and we strive to accomplish what others say we cannot.  This mindset fuels me every day.

Whatever I achieve can also serve as a testament to those who read this:  that a boy growing up in a village called Urla, in Izmir, could make it – and so can you.  The path will invariably be long and winding, yet it is precisely through that journey – with its obstacles, lessons, and incremental victories – that one develops the depth, skill, and resilience necessary to thrive.  Whether your journey takes you to practice in Türkiye or abroad, the lessons learned along the way and the resilience developed will make the destination all the more meaningful.  And as I mentioned a few times already, as you navigate that journey, there will always be people like myself – and many others – ready to guide and support you along the way.   

[1] Cem Kalelioğlu is a Counsel in the International Arbitration Practice Group of Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP in London.  The views discussed in this interview are those of the interviewee and not the views of his firm.  The interviewee would also like to thank Elif Kapısız and Burak Aydoğan for their valuable input, thoughtful questions, and raising issues of particular importance to aspiring international arbitration practitioners.

[2] Burak Aydoğan is currently continuing his studies at Yeditepe University Faculty of Law and is doing an internship at SIAC. The views expressed in this interview are those of the interviewee and do not reflect the views of his firm.